Marooned wrote:So I stocked up for about a month...
ros21m wrote:You stocked up for a month??? Disgusting, that's what is called HOARDING!...
Again the dichotomy of how best to obey the rules? The rule, "Shop as infrequently as possible" automatically means, "Buy enough to last a long time" which breaks the rule, "Don't buy more than you need because it could deprive other people". Like Marooned I also normally shop about every three weeks so I have been buying three weeks worth of groceries for the last 23 years. Buying four weeks worth is hardly hoarding. Normally I would top up with perishable items every few days from the supermarket in the village. (For those who remember the TV series "The League of Gentlemen" its a local
shop for local
people. I never buy the special
from the butchers though.)
You also need to consider the infection rate. At the moment the infection rate is relatively low, even if it is 10 or 100 times the confirmed rate. Also the fact that it is relatively stable for long periods suggests there isn't a vast pool of undetected cases circulating in the community. That infection rate will almost certainly increase, hopefully not too quickly. From a risk point of view it is better to stock up a bit more frequently now, say once per week, so that you don't deplete your reserves and you can then shop less often, say once per month or less if possible, when the infection peaks. I last did a big shop at Lidl and AB on 9 March and at the village supermarket on 17 March and 23 March. I will need to go to the village supermarket again about 1 April. I am watching the infection rate and deciding when to do another Lidl+AB shop, possibly around 9 April or a bit earlier if the infection rate starts to increase sooner.
I think Greece rates better than the UK and worse than some other countries in the measures it has taken. It has certainly responded quickly to implement strong social distancing and make it pretty effective. Only authoritarian regimes like China can make it totally effective. It also has the reverse 112 system operating which allows nationwide and local emergency warnings to be broadcast, which the UK trialled but, despite the success of the trial, never implemented. On the downside, I think Greece has probably been as bad as the UK in its testing regime. Countries like South Korea and Norway, as Mouche's link demonstrates, have done much better and it has had a marked result. Governments around the world claim that "They are following the best scientific advice" but very few seem to be following the scientific advice of the WHO. The ones that are following WHO advice seem to be having the best outcomes which suggests that WHO advice is the best advice. Given that they have taken the lead in fighting epidemics and pandemics around the world for decades it is hardly surprising. I also worry about the resilience of the Greek public healthcare system if the rate of infection does rise quickly despite the measures taken.
The article Mouche linked is about mortality rates
, Kamisiana, not mortality numbers so population size is not a direct factor. The article quotes Case Fatality Rates, CFR, which is the ratio of the number of people who died to the number who have been confirmed to have caught the virus. Population size should not affect that. It is true that population density does affect the spread of the disease, so you would expect a bigger proportion of the population to become infected in a country with a high population density than with a low population density. Again that does not affect the CFR but it would alter the percentage of the total population that died.
PS I was just watching last night's Press Preview on Sky News. One of the two commentators started talking about assessing the economic cost and the possibility that it may be necessary to accept a higher death rate in order to get the economy moving again. Before she got too far the programme cut to an advert without any warning and then cut back to the programme when she was talking about something else. A technical glitch or a case of "Don't frighten the horses"?
PPS It has also just been revealed that the NHS did an exercise a few years ago to test how it would cope with a pandemic. The results were that it wouldn't. The government buried the report and did nothing. If the information is correct then it is a terrible indictment of the UK government at that time.